↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Tiotropium versus placebo for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
7 X users
wikipedia
6 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
128 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
283 Mendeley
Title
Tiotropium versus placebo for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2014
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd009285.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Charlotta Karner, Jimmy Chong, Phillippa Poole

Abstract

Tiotropium is an anticholinergic agent which has gained widespread acceptance as a once daily maintenance therapy for symptoms and exacerbations of stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). In the past few years there have been several systematic reviews of the efficacy of tiotropium, however, several new trials have compared tiotropium treatment with placebo, including those of a soft mist inhaler, making an update necessary.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 283 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 <1%
United States 2 <1%
Unknown 279 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 42 15%
Student > Bachelor 35 12%
Researcher 34 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 30 11%
Other 21 7%
Other 50 18%
Unknown 71 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 101 36%
Nursing and Health Professions 26 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 17 6%
Psychology 16 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 4%
Other 32 11%
Unknown 80 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 22. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 November 2022.
All research outputs
#1,758,813
of 25,806,763 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3,737
of 13,140 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,006
of 240,462 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#69
of 241 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,806,763 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,140 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 240,462 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 241 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.